Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to reduce night time support. We found the Council to be at fault because it took too long to carry out a review of their care and support needs. This caused distress and uncertainty. To remedy this injustice, the Council agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to Mr and Mrs X. We did not find fault with the decision about the level of care.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X complain about the Council’s decision to reduce night time support from two carers to one. They say their complex needs cannot be safely met and the decision is contrary to statutory guidance.
2. They also complain about significant delay in the review process.
3. They say the review process, and its outcome, caused considerable distress uncertainty and poses a significant risk to their health, safety and well-being.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mr and Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mr and Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

Assessment and support planning

8. The Care Act 2014 requires councils to carry out an assessment for any adult appearing to need care and support. The assessment considers the adult’s needs and how they impact on their wellbeing and the results they want to achieve. It must involve the adult and their carer or any other person they might want involved.
9. Councils a legal responsibility to provide a care and support plan (or a support plan for a carer). The care and support plan should consider what needs the person has, what they want to achieve, what they can do by themselves or with existing support and what care and support may be available in the local area. When preparing a care and support plan the council must involve any carer the adult has. The support plan must include a personal budget, which is the money the council has worked out it will cost to arrange the necessary care and support for that person.
10. In determining how to meet needs, the council may take into reasonable consideration its own finances and budgetary position, and must comply with its related public law duties. This includes the importance of ensuring that the funding available to the council is sufficient to meet the needs of the entire local population. A council may reasonably consider how to balance that requirement with the duty to meet the eligible needs of an individual in determining how an individual’s needs should be met.
11. Councils should keep care and support plans under review. Councils should review plans at least every 12 months. 
12. Reviews will help to identify if the person’s needs have changed and can in such circumstances lead to a reassessment and other circumstances which may have changed. The review must not be used as a mechanism to arbitrarily reduce the level of a person’s personal budget.
13. Councils must carry out assessments over a suitable and reasonable timescale considering the urgency of needs and any variation in those needs. Councils should tell people when their assessment will take place and keep them informed throughout the assessment.

Combining plans

14. The Care and Support Statutory Guidance states councils should not develop plans in isolation from other plans (such as plans of carers or family members).
15. Councils should attempt to establish where other plans are present, or are being conducted and seek to combine plans, if appropriate. This should be considered early on in the planning process (at the same time as considering the person’s needs and how they can be met in a holistic way) to ensure that the package of care and support is developed in a way that fits with what support is already being received or developed.

What happened

16. Below is a summary of the key events leading to this investigation. It is not an exhaustive chronology of every exchange between parties. Where necessary, I have expanded on some of these events in the “Analysis” section of this decision statement.
17. Mr and Mrs X have significant support needs that require 24 hour care. Prior to their marriage, Mrs X lived in the area of a different local authority (Council D). Council D provided Mrs X with an overnight carer, as did the Council for Mr X.
18. After their marriage, Mrs Y went to live with her husband. The Council continued with the level of support previously provided by Council D. This meant Mr and Mrs X both employed a carer to assist with their individual care and support needs.
19. In June 2022, the Council carried out a review of Mr X’s care and support needs. From the outset, the Council told Mr and Mrs X it was possible they may be expected to share one carer at night.
20. Mr and Mrs X strongly opposed this suggestion, primarily on safety grounds. They said one of them may potentially be at grave risk if a carer was attending to the other one and was unable to respond.
21. In response to the concerns raised by Mr and Mrs X, the Council sought advice from an occupational therapist and the fire service. Mr X also provided a log of recent nocturnal support
22. In July 2023, the Council advised Mr and Mrs X it still intended to reduce the night time support. But because so much time had passed since the initial review, further discussion was needed to ensure needs had been accurately captured and nothing has changed.
23. The social worker requesting a meeting about this in November 2023, that took place in January 2024.
24. Mr and Mrs X were told the decision to reduce night time care was because they did not wake every night and if they did so, it was likely to be for only a few times per night.
25. Mr and Mrs X lodged a formal complaint, via their advocate, in May 2024. This was not upheld, reiterating the reasons given by the social worker during the January 2024 meeting.
26. In response to the Ombudsman’s enquiries Council confirmed the new arrangement had been in place since February 2025.

Analysis

27. If a person has eligible needs, councils have a legal duty to meet them. This does not mean a council must provide everything a person wants. Wants and needs are different. This is sometimes a tricky area, because service users and councils may disagree about what is a want and what is a need.
28. It is not the Ombudsman’s role to say what a person’s needs are, or what services they should receive. The Ombudsman’s role is to consider if a council has followed the correct process to assess a person’s needs. In doing so we look at what information the council considered. If a council considers all this information properly the Ombudsman cannot find a council at fault just because a service user disagrees with its decision, or outcome of an assessment or support plan.
29. Mr and Mrs X assert their needs had not changed, and so there was no justification for a reduction in their respective care packages. They also said the law does not allow for the Council to merge their support plans. Instead, they argued they should be assessed as individuals and their support plans should reflect this.
30. The Care Act guidance does allow for councils to take into account the circumstances of family members, including spouses, when making decisions about support, as set out above. The guidance also expects councils to have regard to its overall budgetary position, as well as the needs of the individuals involved.
31. My conclusion is the Council was not at fault in how it made its decision to provide only one carer at night. In reaching its decision, the Council followed the procedure we would expect to see when it was proposing to reduce support. This included:

• discussing its proposal with the affected parties at an early stage;
• considering information provided by Mr and Mrs X; and
• obtaining assessment and advice from other relevant professionals, including occupational therapy and the fire service,

32. The Council also explained its rationale for the decision, both in person, and in response to Mr and Mrs X’s formal complaint. I appreciate Mr and Mrs X strongly disagreed with the Council’s decision and disputed Mr Y’s needs could be met with these hours, however these are matters of professional judgement. It was a decision the Council was entitled to make. As I have not identified fault in the process, I cannot question the merits of it or say it should have reached a different outcome.
33. Whilst I do not criticise the outcome, I have found fault with the time taken to carry out the review and implement the reduction in support. Mr and Mrs X were informed in 2022 that it was likely their support would be reduced, at the start of the review process. It took approximately two and a half years for the Council to make this change. The case was allowed to drift and the case records I have seen provide no explanation for this. The guidance expects assessments and reviews to be carried out in a timely fashion. This did not happen in this case and was fault.
34. It is entirely understandable that this delay caused Mrs and Mrs X avoidable distress and frustration, particularly as it was clear from the outset they were extremely unhappy about the Council’s proposal to reduce their care package. This is injustice that requires a remedy.

Back to top

Agreed action

35. Within four weeks from the date of my final decision, the Council has agreed to take the following action.
1. Apologise in writing to Mr and Mrs X.
2. Pay Mrs and Mrs X £200 each as a symbolic payment to acknowledge their distress and frustration caused by delay in the review process.
3. By training or other means, remind relevant members of staff of the need to complete reviews within a reasonable timescale and not allow cases to drift.
36. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

37. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to action my recommendations to remedy the personal injustice to Mr and Mrs X and improve its service. On this basis, I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman